Hi, all,

I guess I'll jump in here, mostly with a question.

I think we already have a strong case for the need for a permanent organization, and that case will likely be made stronger by the second, larger survey that has been suggested.  In my opinion, this organization would ideally serve two purposes: networking within the liberal arts computing community, and providing leadership that could be our "voice" to others (others = non-liberal-arts computing + non-computing liberal arts + other others).  Perhaps thinking about our intended audience will help us clarify our "voice."  I think it's natural that it would sometimes be directed at the broader SIGCSE and ACM communities.  It would also be useful for the new organization to put together cohesive information/data about liberal arts computing that could be presented to college/university administrators at our institutions to put what we do and what we need in context when issues or opportunities arise.

So... in response to Doug's question: Why do we need a voice?  Because we have unique qualities that sometimes need to be communicated to parties outside the community.  Identifying those parties could go a long way toward helping us think about what the "voice" should be saying and why.  Where/ to whom would it make sense to communicate our unique successes, challenges, needs, goals, etc? 


Angela Berardinelli, PhD
Assistant Professor of Mathematics
Department of Mathematics and Information Technology
Mercyhurst University
E-mail:       [log in to unmask]
Direct Line:  814-824-2421
Website:      math.mercyhurst.edu/~aberardine
Office:       Old Main Tower 403
Mail:         501 East 38th Street
              Erie, PA 16546

On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 11:13 AM Douglas Baldwin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
The liberal arts computer science consortium (LACS) had its summer meeting last week, and asked me to give a report on our committee's progress. The format was short report followed by discussion. For those interested, I've attached my slides from the "short report" part; you can also get them from Google drive at


The discussion suggested that LACS is very supportive of this committee spinning off a larger permanent group of liberal arts computing educators, which group would probably have many LACS members in it.

Also, two things occurred to me as I was making these slides: first, apart from the two slides inviting discussion (or maybe even with something like them), they might suggest a structure for our eventual report. Second, the place where I think we need the most additional data or support for that report is the question of whether liberal arts computing needs an institutional "voice" -- we probably think it does, but I haven't seen much discussion of that question, and particularly of why it does. Maybe something to talk about now...